A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Effects of intra-fraction motion on IMRT dose delivery: statistical analysis and simulation. | LitMetric

There has been some concern that organ motion, especially intra-fraction organ motion due to breathing, can negate the potential merit of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). We wanted to find out whether this concern is justified. Specifically, we wanted to investigate whether IMRT delivery techniques with moving parts, e.g., with a multileaf collimator (MLC), are particularly sensitive to organ motion due to the interplay between organ motion and leaf motion. We also wanted to know if, and by how much, fractionation of the treatment can reduce the effects. We performed a statistical analysis and calculated the expected dose values and dose variances for volume elements of organs that move during the delivery of the IMRT. We looked at the overall influence of organ motion during the course of a fractionated treatment. A linear-quadratic model was used to consider fractionation effects. Furthermore, we developed software to simulate motion effects for IMRT delivery with an MLC, with compensators, and with a scanning beam. For the simulation we assumed a sinusoidal motion in an isocentric plane. We found that the expected dose value is independent of the treatment technique. It is just a weighted average over the path of motion of the dose distribution without motion. If the treatment is delivered in several fractions, the distribution of the dose around the expected value is close to a Gaussian. For a typical treatment with 30 fractions, the standard deviation is generally within 1% of the expected value for MLC delivery if one assumes a typical motion amplitude of 5 mm (1 cm peak to peak). The standard deviation is generally even smaller for the compensator but bigger for scanning beam delivery. For the latter it can be reduced through multiple deliveries ('paintings') of the same field. In conclusion, the main effect of organ motion in IMRT is an averaging of the dose distribution without motion over the path of the motion. This is the same as for treatments with conventional beams. Additional effects that are specific to the IMRT delivery technique appear to be relatively small, except for the scanning beam.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/47/13/302DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

organ motion
24
motion
15
imrt delivery
12
scanning beam
12
motion imrt
8
statistical analysis
8
expected dose
8
path motion
8
dose distribution
8
distribution motion
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!